Arguing Dialectically about Abortion

How do we argue about abortion? How do we think and speak clearly about a topic that evokes such strong reactions?

One approach is to think dialectically–to critically examine arguments pro or con, in order to uncover the assumptions and grounds they rest on, and develop new arguments that respond to the faults we find in our prior positions.

In keeping with Political Animal Magazine’s mission to publish articles with philosophic insight from genuinely different perspectives, we are proud to present two pieces here, from very different viewpoints, that both aim to think through problems in how we argue about abortion.

In another, Hendrik van der Breggen takes a pro-life position, critiquing a number of opposing arguments to a high degree of scrutiny. Both articles present the kinds of arguments that people wishing to think seriously about abortion will have to consider.

POLITICAL ANIMAL IS AN OPEN FORUM FOR SMART AND ACCESSIBLE DISCUSSIONS OF ALL THINGS POLITICAL. WHEREVER YOUR BELIEFS LIE ON THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM, THERE IS A PLACE FOR YOU HERE. OUR COMMITMENT IS TO QUALITY, NOT PARTY, AND WE INVITE ALL POLITICAL ANIMALS TO SEIZE THEIR VOICE WITH US.